Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07/15/1999 (2) Minutes of a Regular Meeting July 15, 1999 Town of Los Altos Hills City Council Regular Meeting Thursday, July 15, 1999, 6:00 P.M. Council Chambers, 26379 Fremont Road 1. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL Mayor Dauber called the Regular Meeting of the City Council to order at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at Town Hall. Present: Mayor Dauber and Councilmembers Casey, Finn, Johnson and Siegel Absent: None Staff: City Manager William Norton, City Attorney Sandy Sloan, Planning Director Curtis Williams, Public Works Manager Jim Rasp and City Clerk Pat Dowd Press: Wendy Marinaccio, Los Altos Town Crier • Dauber asked that the following two items be added to the agenda as urgency items: Proclamation stating August 15, 1999 as Republic of Korea Independence Day and a proposal for upgrades for Council Chambers. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously to add a proclamation on Korean Independence Day to the Consent Calendar and to add a proposal for upgrades for the Council Chambers to Old Business. 2. APPOINTMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS 2.1 Interview and Appointment to the Planning Commission Charles Wong, 14250 Miranda, commented on his interest in serving on the Planning Commission. He stated that he now had more time and wanted to contribute to the community. He also wanted to be part of the process and believed the fast track decision was a step forward in the changing environment of the Town. Mr. Wong also commented that he was Asian American and wanted to be a role model in the community. It was noted that this completed the interviews for the vacancy on the Planning Commission. At the last meeting Harry Emerzian, Fred Fallah and Sandra Humphries had been interviewed. July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 1 MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously to appoint Charles Wong to the Planning Commission for a four year term. 3. PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT The Planning Director reported that the following applications were discussed at the 7/14/99 Planning Commission Meeting: Lands of Burger, 25850 Westwind Way: approved request for a site development permit for a new residence and a variance to exceed the maximum development area permitted; Lands of Quinn and Panofsky, 25671 and 25691 Chapin Road, approved request for a lot line adjustment; Lands of Quinn, 25671 Chapin Road: approved request for a conditional development permit and a site development permit for a new residence and variances to exceed the allowable maximum development area and maximum floor area and to allow required parking within the setback; Lands of Wythe &Vitu, 13828 Moon Lane: approved request for a site development permit for a new residence; and Lands of Windy Hill, 12780 Camino Medio Lane: approved request for a site development permit for a new residence,pool and spa. Casey appealed the decision on Lands of Quinn. This public hearing will be set for the next Council Meeting on September 2, 1999. Casey strongly urged Councilmembers to attend Planning Commission Meetings particularly as the fast track ordinance was being put into place. She had attended • the meetings and was quite pleased at the Chairman's handling of the meetings. Casey did think that it was important and would be productive for the Council and Commission to have a joint meeting to further define the fast track ordinance. However, Casey expressed her surprise that Commissioner Schreiner stepped down from the Commission on the Wythe/Vitu application but proceeded to speak to this application from the floor. Casey did not think this was ethically correct and further believed it was not right that Commissioners should be allowed to so influence their peers. She noted meetings at which Councilmembers had stepped down from hearing applications but had not addressed the Council with their opinions. Casey asked that if indeed this action was not technically illegal that the Council agendize the matter for discussion. She believed a Council policy should be in place not allowing such activity. Dauber stated that there were issues and it could be something that may affect you such as the house next door. She did not think they wanted to be unable to speak out if there was something. The City Attorney responded that she would check the Conflict of Interest laws but she did not believe it was appropriate for Commissioners to step down and then speak to applications. July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 2 . Dot Schreiner, Planning Commissioner, stated that she had specfically asked the Planning Director if she could speak to this application and was advised that she could. She stated that she had spoken on this application in the past and had spoken in a factual manner. 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Item Removed: 4.4 (City Manager) MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously to approve the balance of the Consent Calendar, specifically: 4.1 Approved Minutes: Jul e Y 1, 1999 (Regular lar Meetin g) 4.2 Approved Warrants: $292,592.34 (6/23/99 -- 6/30/99) 4.3 Adopted Ordinance#401 amending Title 8 of Municipal Code to adopt by reference the 1998 California Building Standards Code, including Uniform Building, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire Codes, and the 1995 edition of the Cabo one and two family Dwelling code,with amendments, and adoption of a negative declaration 4.5 Accepted agreement for sanitary sewer easement, Lands of Ayyar, 12121 Oak Park Court--Reso#46-99 4.6 Accepted agreement for sanitary sewer easement, Prime Home Development, Inc., 12125 Oak Park Court--Reso#47-99 4.7 Issued Proclamation: Republic of Korea Independence Day-- August 15, 1999 Item Removed: 4.4 Award of contract for Pavement Management and Storm Drain Improvement CIP 98-99 and amending the 1998-99 Capital Budget to include Santa Clara County's Measure B Pavement Management Program Funds and additional Funding for the Town's Pavement Management CIP Project -- Resolutions # The City Manager stated that he had removed this item from the Consent Calendar for two reasons: 1) a protest had been received from another bidder, O'Grady Paving,because they said Granite Construction(low bidder)had not listed its subcontractors; and 2) additional specifications and design work which could be done in the field was needed and an additional $10,000 needed to be added to the project cost. The City Attorney had reviewed the protest from O'Grady and had found no fault with Granite's bid. • July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 3 • MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Siegel and passed unanimously to adopt Resolution#48-99 awarding a contract to Granite Construction for the construction of the Pavement Management Project FY98-99 and Resolution#49-99 amending the 1998-99 Capital Budget to include Santa Clara County's Measure B Pavement Management Program Funds, and additional funding for the Town's Pavement Management CIP Project, as amended to include an additional $10,000. 5. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 5.1 Proposals for cosmetic upgrades to the Council Chambers Ethel Blank, Exhibit Curator,presented two proposals to the Council for consideration. The first concerned the chairs in Chambers and included a$5,200 estimate to recover the existing chairs and a$13,000 proposal to replace them. At this time, after several people at this meeting had sat in the sample chair, she was withdrawing this request for new chairs. They were not sturdy nor comfortable. The other proposal was for$19,000. This included electrical work, new ceilings,painting,new doors, etc. The City Manager reported that by September he should have the estimates for structural repairs to Town Hall and the Council Chambers. At that time there should be a clearer understanding of whether it was more effective to rebuild or arrange for upgrades to the buildings. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To continue this item pending additional information. 6. NEW BUSINESS 6.1 Resolution authorizing grant of easement to Pacific Bell on Town Land for installation of an underground vault, and letter of agreement--Reso # Council had several questions about this issue including: how many homes would be served?; how much should they pay the Town?; and where would their trucks park when working? PASSED BY CONSENSUS: Since a representative was not present from Pacific Bell, it was agreed to continue this item to the September 2"a Council Meeting. It was further agreed that this request should be given to the Utility and Information Systems Committee for review and comment. 7. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES, SUB-COMMITTEES, AND COUNCILMEMBERS ON OUTSIDE AGENCIES 7.1 Report on newly established subcommittee on airport noise (continued from the July 1, 1999 Council Meeting) i July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 4 Dauber reported that Jim Abraham, Marjorie Evans and Ken Schroeder had agreed to serve on an airport noise task force committee with Jim serving as the chairman. This committee would keep the Council advised on airport noise issues and recommend actions that the Council should take. 7.2 Report from subcommittee (Casey and Dauber) on review of design guidelines (continued from the July 1, 1999 Council Meeting) Dauber reported that she and Councilmember Casey,the Design Guidelines Subcommittee,had met and while in agreement on some issues,needed Council direction on what architectural features were limited by the fast track ordinance. The fast track ordinance referred to four specific design elements that the site development authority was no longer authorized to regulate: architectural style, chimneys, window treatment and skylights. The question under discussion was what other architectural design features should be on the list. Casey believed the issue was how the design guidelines fit in with the fast track ordinance. She recommended a joint meeting of the Council and Planning Commission in September to discuss this issue. She believed it would help to have another month of experience in dealing with the implementation of the fast track ordinance. Siegel and Johnson believed that they should see how this fast track ordinance works for a while. They noted that rewriting the design guidelines would be a major task. Finn did not believe design guidelines should be used at all. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Dauber, seconded by Siegel and passed by the following roll call vote to schedule a joint meeting of the Council and Commission in September to discuss this issue and in the meantime to limit the design guidelines to those specifically stated in the ordinance. AYES: Mayor Dauber and Councilmembers Johnson and Siegel NOES: Mayor Pro Tem Finn and Councilmember Casey 7.3 Appointments to the Land Use Element Committee PASSED BY CONSENSUS: Council made the following appointments to the Land Use Element Committee: Emily Cheng, Doni Hubbard, Richard Lamparter and Evan Wythe 8. STAFF REPORTS 8.1 City Manager 8.1.1 August City Council Meeting Schedule MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Johnson, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to cancel both the August 5th and August 19th Council Meetings. Council also agreed to hold a joint meeting with the Pathways Committee at 5:00 p.m. on September 2, 1999. 8.2 City Attorney July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 5 The City Attorney stated that she had checked the Conflict of Interest Code and it appeared that Wommissioners could speak to applications when they had stepped down from the discussion. However, she noted that she would be preparing a full report on this for the Council. Dot Schreiner, Planning Commissioner,reiterated that she did not have to step down legally from the discussion on this application. 8.3 City Clerk 8.3.1 Report on Council Correspondence 9. COUNCIL-INITIATED ITEMS 9.1 Discussion of desirability to change the appeal ordinance from 21 to 22 days (Mayor Dauber) Dauber noted that with the change in dates for the Council Meetings Council now did not see Planning Commission approvals on their agendas. Rather they were notified by letter from the City Clerk of approvals and the time frame in which to appeal them. Dauber believed it would be a more open process if these items appeared on the Council's agendas as the public would be aware of these approvals. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Siegel and passed *Manimously to direct staff to prepare an ordinance changing the appeal period from 21 to 22 days. 9.2 Discussion of definition of'attic' in Town ordinances (Mayor Dauber) Dauber raised her concerns about a definition of'attic'. She noted that the only mention in the code was that'attic spaces that measure over seven feet from top of floor to underside of roof shall count as floor area'. She referred to recent situations which she believed reinforced her point that this definition needed to be clarified. Council discussed this issue but did not agree it was an area that needed clarification. 9.3 Discussion of definition of'carport' in Town ordinances (Mayor Dauber) Dauber recommended that the Council adopt a definition of'carports'. Casey believed this should have a staff report and be agendized for Council discussion. PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To direct staff to prepare a report on a definition of'carport'. 9.4 Authorization to attend the League of California Cities Annual Conference - San Jose, October 10-12, 1999 MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Johnson and passed unanimously to authorize attendance at the League Conference for any Councilmember who . wished to attend but not to authorize any travel expenses since this conference was going to be held in San Jose. July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 6 9.5 Community Health Awareness Council (Mayor Dauber) Dauber reported that CHAC would be increasing their request to the Town for financial support by double. 9.6 Community Center for the Arts (Councilmember Johnson) Johnson reported that this committee, on which he had represented the Town,was no longer active and had been disbanded. 9.7 Joint Volunteer Awards (Councilmember Johnson) Johnson reported that there were two vacancies on this committee. 9.8 Meeting with Judge Manoukian(Mayor Dauber) Dauber reported that she and the City Manager and representatives from other cities had had an interesting and informative meeting with Judge Manoukian on issues of local interest. 10. PRESENTATIONS FROM THE FLOOR PUBLIC HEARINGS 11.1 Request for an exception to a conservation easement to allow a hard surface turnaround for mail delivery: Lands of Moon Lane Development, 13824 Moon Lane Janet Vitu, applicant, explained to the Council their reasons for requesting this exception. The Post Office currently was delivering the mail for the three lots to Page Mill. Their requirements to deliver to Moon Lane included a hard surface (not a material like grass crete) and adequate turn around area. Ms. Vitu stated that they had discussed this matter with the Post Office and postal representatives had been to the property. They had asked the Post Office for a letter but to date had not received one. Evan Wythe, applicant, stated that they already had multiple surfaces on the property and their preference would be to stay with pavers. Dauber suggested that the Planning Director talk to the Post Office and ask them to allow the most permeable surface to be used. She also asked if this was precedent setting in that the Post Office did not usually deliver mail on private driveways. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Casey, seconded by Finn and passed unanimously to approve the request for an exception to a conservation easement to July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 7 allow a paved U.S. Post Office vehicular turnaround at 13824 Moon Lane (Parcel 3) • Lands of Moon Lane Development, subject to the Planning Commission's recommended conditions of approval and findings with the added condition that the Town receive a letter from the Post Office stating that they will deliver the mail to this location. 11.2 Proposed amendments to Matadero Creek Subdivision Conditions of Approval, Related to Building Coverage and Maximum Development Area and Negative Declaration The Planning Director presented background on the Matadero Creek Subdivision, a report on his review of the development statistics and a recommendation. Upon approval of the last of the twenty residences in the subdivision (Lot 7) in 1998, the City Council directed staff to prepare revisions to the conditions of approval which govern allowable development on each parcel. The conditions were initially approved in 1981, and set limitations on development area, building coverage, and roofline elevation for each lot, all of which were (and are) more restrictive than the Town's code. The conditions of approval established, for each lot, an "unencumbered area" of land which excluded conservation and open space easements, and then applied the Town's criteria for development area and building coverage to that area. Those conditions were then also incorporated into the neighborhood's covenants, conditions and restrictions (CC&R's), which form private agreements between residents of the subdivision. In the intervening years, however, the Town's codes had changed, and some of the original requirements, such as building coverage, no longer were relevant to the current regulations, and/or they • were very cumbersome to monitor. The City Council had asked that the standards for the subdivision be simplified and reviewed with respect to today's regulations. The proposed the subdivision conditions as follows: Delete the posed amendment would modify building coverage limitation, as it no longer exists in the Town's Code; Retain the roofline elevation limits, as outlined in the conditions and in the CC&R's; and Calculate the Maximum Development Area (MDA) for each lot based on the current Code formula applied to the "unencumbered" area of the lot, and using the present Code definition of "development area", i.e., including second story floor area. In no case,however, would the MDA be reduced to less than the current conditions of approval allow, or less than the development area now existing on a lot. The following table summarizes the impact on the allowable maximum development area MDA for each lot showing the MDA allowed b the existing subdivision conditions the (MDA) � g Y g MDA allowed under the proposed formula, and an estimate of current development area for each lot. The bold numbers indicate the higher of the first two figures, which would then be allowable for that lot. The impact of the proposed development area condition varies substantially. Thirteen (13) of the lots could increase development area from existing (estimated) levels of development, and seven (7) others would be considered at or over their limit of MDA (non-conforming). Increases allowed would range from 4 square feet (lot 5) to 3,331 square feet (lot 2). Only nine (9) of the lots are currently conforming with the existing MDA conditions of the subdivision, so that the proposed modification would July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 8 • actually decrease non-conformity for the subdivision. Staff believes that this proposal is balanced and equitable in that it closely reflects today's MDA standards applied to the "unencumbered" area of each lot, without decreasing the allowable development area on any lot. Table 1 Matadero Creek Subdivision Maximum Development Area (MDA) Comparison) _Existing Proposed E�st�ng ¢ Address Conditions of Formula Development A royal Areal 1 28530 Matadero Creek Lane 11,760 14,838 13,129 2 28525 Matadero Creek Lane 11,920 11,259 8,589 3 28520 Matadero Creek Lane 12,240 9,720 9,426 4 28515 Matadero Creek Lane 10,980 8,852 12,059 5 28510 Matadero Creek Lane 8,380 6,047 8,376 6 28505 Matadero Creek Lane 8,880 7,297 10,750 • 7 28500 Matadero Creek Lane 11,340 11,394 11,332 8 28600 Matadero Creek Court 8,540 6,508 10,234 9 28605 Matadero Creek Court 9,220 11,779 13,055 10 28610 Matadero Creek Court 9,500 6,936 9,027 11 28615 Matadero Creek Court 8,460 7,510 9,066 12 28620 Matadero Creek Court 11,175 9,730 10,851 13 28625 Matadero Creek Court 10,200 9,224 8,401 14 28628 Matadero Creek Court 10,160 12,936 12,136 15 28560 Matadero Creek Lane 12,360 8,537 13,950 16 28635 Matadero Creek Court 13,040 14,963 13,118 17 28555 Matadero Creek Lane 13,900 16,555 15,851 18 28550 Matadero Creek Lane 15,165 17,506 15,120 19 28545 Matadero Creek Lane 13,720 15,954 13,679 20 28540 Matadero Creek Lane 9,030 10,112 12,984 'Numbers in bold would be new MDA; existing development area in excess of MDA would be legally non-conforming. 2Staff estimates from project files; includes second floor area. Rick and Charlie Ellinger, 25820 Matadero Creek Lane; Bob Lefkowits, 28515 Matadero Creek Lane; Ann Ward, 27945 Via Ventana; Bill Riffle, 28525 Matadero Creek Lane; and Gary • July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 9 • Daichendt, 28550 Matadero Creek Lane addressed the Council and expressed their support for the Planning Director's recommendation and report on this complicated issue. They noted that according to this report no owner would get less development area and there would be far less confusion. This would be consistent for all and would bring the Matadero Creek Subdivision in line with other Town regulations. Mr. and Mrs. Jain, 28510 Matadero Creek Lane, did not agree with the Planning Director's recommended report. They believed this recommendation gave the larger lots more and the smaller lots less. It was not equitable and lowered property values. Council discussed the history of the Matadero Creek Subdivision and the Planning Director's recommendation. In addition they discussed the application of the subdivision's conditions of approval,the CC&Rs (covenants, conditions and restrictions) and Ordinance#305. Casey questioned the fairness of this recommendation as it applied to the Jains' lot and commented on the issue of counting or not counting the second floor. One proposal that was also discussed was having a 9,000 square foot minimum. MOTION SECONDED AND CARRIED: Moved by Siegel, seconded by Dauber and passed unanimously to adopt the proposed negative declaration and to approve the revised development standards for the Matadero Creek Subdivision(Tract No. 7187), as outlined in the following amendment and citing the following findings: AMENDMENT TO FINAL MAP • TRACT NO. 7187 MATADERO CREEK SUBDIVISION FILE#11-99-FM-AMEND 1. This map amendment modifies Condition #713 of the subdivision conditions of approval for Tract #7187 (Matadero Creek Subdivision), related to building coverage and development area. 2. The Maximum Development Area (MDA) for each lot shall be calculated based on the current Code formula (Section 10-1.502 of the Zoning Code) applied to the "unencumbered" area of the lot, i.e., excluding conservation easements, open space easements, and access easements. 3. "Development area" shall be defined as provided in the Town of Los Altos Hills Zoning Code, Section 10-1.502, and as may be amended from time to time. 4. In.no case, however, shall the MDA be reduced to less than that permitted by prior Council action (Table 1 attached), or less than the approved development area existing on a lot, whichever is greater. • 5. Building coverage limitations shall no longer apply to the subdivision. July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 10 • FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF FINAL MAP AMENDMENT TRACT NO. 7187 MATADERO CREEK SUBDIVISION FILE#1 1-99-FM-AMEND 1. The amendment assures that the improvements can be accommodated and designed with minimal impact to neighbors, as any resultant increases in development would be modest and would be proportional to the size and slope of the lot. 2. The modifications would not impose an additional burden on the present fee owners of other properties in the subdivision, as the extent of any increases would be modest and would result in similar development area as exists on adjacent lots. 3. The modification does not alter any right, title, or interest in the real property reflected on the recorded map. While the modification may result in an increase of development area as prescribed in the subdivision conditions, the proposed amount of development area would meet the Town's Zoning Code requirements. 4. The modification would be consistent with the Town's General Plan in that the relationship of any proposed changes in development area would relate specifically to the size and slope of the lot, exclusive of open space and conservation easements. 5. The properties affected by the proposed change in development area limitations are limited, and increases would be modest, minimizing the potential impact of the amendment on neighboring properties and from Page Mill Road. Granting of the amendment will be consistent with the original intent of the subdivision to maintain open space and separation between property improvements. 6. The proposed modification will not cause public health problems, or environmental damage, including injury to fish or wildlife and their habitats. 7. The proposed modification will not adversely affect any existing easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of, the affected properties. 8. The conditions of the subdivision have changed since the original approval such that the Town's definition of "development area" now includes second floor area, and because "building coverage"limitations no longer • July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 11 exist. The proposed amendment would provide more consistency with current Town regulations, while preserving the intent of the original subdivision conditions. 12. ADJOURNMENT There being no further new or old business to discuss, the City Council Meeting was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Dowd City Clerk The minutes of the July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting were approved at the September 2, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting. • • July 15, 1999 Regular City Council Meeting 12